Intra‐aortic balloon pump: is the technique really outdated?
Abstract Aims Intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP) utilization was expected to be quickly abandoned following the IABP‐shock trial and its class III, level B recommendation in the 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of IABP compared with ot...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2020-06-01
|
| Series: | ESC Heart Failure |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.12721 |
| _version_ | 1818436899245654016 |
|---|---|
| author | Mariama Akodad Clément Delmas Laurent Bonello Claire Duflos François Roubille |
| author_facet | Mariama Akodad Clément Delmas Laurent Bonello Claire Duflos François Roubille |
| author_sort | Mariama Akodad |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Aims Intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP) utilization was expected to be quickly abandoned following the IABP‐shock trial and its class III, level B recommendation in the 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of IABP compared with other mechanical support devices in a nationwide approach. Methods and results We conducted a retrospective study based on the French national hospital discharge database. All patients undergoing assist device implantation by IABP, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or IMPELLA® from 2014 to 2018 (2 years before/2 years after the 2016 guidelines) were included. The primary endpoint was the incidence of IABP implantation over the years. Secondary endpoints were incidence of total assist device, ECMO, and IMPELLA® implantations. From 2014 to 2018, a total of 18 940 patients benefited from mechanical support by IABP (n = 6657, 35.2%), ECMO (n = 11 881, 62.7%), or IMPELLA® (n = 402, 2.1%) in France. The incidence of total mechanical support implantations (ECMO and IABP) was constant over the years. IABP implantations decreased progressively from 1725 implantations in 2014 to 996 in 2018 (−42%). By contrast, ECMO implantations increased progressively from 1919 implantations in 2014 to 2763 implantations in 2018 (+44%). IMPELLA® implantations remained stable over the years from 63 (1.7%) implantations in 2014 to 83 (2.1%) in 2018. Conclusions In this nationwide real‐life study, despite a significant decline in IABP implantations over the years since the ESC guidelines, this device remained used in clinical practice with around 1000 implantations in 2018. The size of centres was not strictly correlated with this use, suggesting differential uses depending on the local background. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-14T17:16:06Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-fb9a54fa21c84f23bce9a819ea95d9b8 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2055-5822 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-14T17:16:06Z |
| publishDate | 2020-06-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | ESC Heart Failure |
| spelling | doaj.art-fb9a54fa21c84f23bce9a819ea95d9b82022-12-21T22:53:25ZengWileyESC Heart Failure2055-58222020-06-01731025103010.1002/ehf2.12721Intra‐aortic balloon pump: is the technique really outdated?Mariama Akodad0Clément Delmas1Laurent Bonello2Claire Duflos3François Roubille4Department of Cardiology Montpellier University Hospital 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5 FranceIntensive Cardiac Care Unit, Cardiology Department University Hospital of Rangueil 31059 Toulouse FranceDepartment of Cardiology, Intensive Care Unit Aix‐Marseille Université, Assistance Publique‐Hôpitaux de Marseille, Hôpital Nord Marseille FranceDepartment of Medical Information Montpellier University Hospital 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5 FranceDepartment of Cardiology Montpellier University Hospital 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5 FranceAbstract Aims Intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP) utilization was expected to be quickly abandoned following the IABP‐shock trial and its class III, level B recommendation in the 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of IABP compared with other mechanical support devices in a nationwide approach. Methods and results We conducted a retrospective study based on the French national hospital discharge database. All patients undergoing assist device implantation by IABP, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or IMPELLA® from 2014 to 2018 (2 years before/2 years after the 2016 guidelines) were included. The primary endpoint was the incidence of IABP implantation over the years. Secondary endpoints were incidence of total assist device, ECMO, and IMPELLA® implantations. From 2014 to 2018, a total of 18 940 patients benefited from mechanical support by IABP (n = 6657, 35.2%), ECMO (n = 11 881, 62.7%), or IMPELLA® (n = 402, 2.1%) in France. The incidence of total mechanical support implantations (ECMO and IABP) was constant over the years. IABP implantations decreased progressively from 1725 implantations in 2014 to 996 in 2018 (−42%). By contrast, ECMO implantations increased progressively from 1919 implantations in 2014 to 2763 implantations in 2018 (+44%). IMPELLA® implantations remained stable over the years from 63 (1.7%) implantations in 2014 to 83 (2.1%) in 2018. Conclusions In this nationwide real‐life study, despite a significant decline in IABP implantations over the years since the ESC guidelines, this device remained used in clinical practice with around 1000 implantations in 2018. The size of centres was not strictly correlated with this use, suggesting differential uses depending on the local background.https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.12721Intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP)Mechanical supportCardiogenic shockExtracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) |
| spellingShingle | Mariama Akodad Clément Delmas Laurent Bonello Claire Duflos François Roubille Intra‐aortic balloon pump: is the technique really outdated? ESC Heart Failure Intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP) Mechanical support Cardiogenic shock Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) |
| title | Intra‐aortic balloon pump: is the technique really outdated? |
| title_full | Intra‐aortic balloon pump: is the technique really outdated? |
| title_fullStr | Intra‐aortic balloon pump: is the technique really outdated? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Intra‐aortic balloon pump: is the technique really outdated? |
| title_short | Intra‐aortic balloon pump: is the technique really outdated? |
| title_sort | intra aortic balloon pump is the technique really outdated |
| topic | Intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP) Mechanical support Cardiogenic shock Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.12721 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mariamaakodad intraaorticballoonpumpisthetechniquereallyoutdated AT clementdelmas intraaorticballoonpumpisthetechniquereallyoutdated AT laurentbonello intraaorticballoonpumpisthetechniquereallyoutdated AT claireduflos intraaorticballoonpumpisthetechniquereallyoutdated AT francoisroubille intraaorticballoonpumpisthetechniquereallyoutdated |